%0 Journal Article %1 winegardner_terminology_2012 %A Winegardner, Amanda K. %A Jones, Brittany K. %A Ng, Ingrid S. Y. %A Siqueira, Tadeu %A Cottenie, Karl %D 2012 %J Trends in Ecology & Evolution %K imported %N 5 %P 253--254 %R 10.1016/j.tree.2012.01.007 %T The terminology of metacommunity ecology %U http://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/fulltext/S0169-5347(12)00026-2?large_figure=true %V 27 %X One of the most promising theoretical frameworks for studying responses to ecological change is the metacommunity concept. Recent work by Logue et al. 1 provided the first comprehensive synthesis of empirical metacommunity research since the seminal work by Leibold et al. published in 2004 2. In their original work 2, Leibold et al. outlined the theoretical framework for the study of a metacommunity, a set of local communities connected by dispersing species. Logue et al.1 point out some of the limitations of the original concept as well as more recent research. More importantly, they make three recommendations for future research in metacommunity ecology to continue to advance this field: (i) the extension of empirical approaches to different and varied metacommunity systems; (ii) the integration of established metacommunity paradigms; and (iii) work incorporating meta-ecosystem and evolutionary mechanisms. These are important recommendations, but we think that their second recommendation is a necessary condition for the other two. We propose that a revision of the terminology used by Leibold et al. 2 can already accomplish part of this integration.

@article{winegardner_terminology_2012, abstract = {One of the most promising theoretical frameworks for studying responses to ecological change is the metacommunity concept. Recent work by Logue et al. [1] provided the first comprehensive synthesis of empirical metacommunity research since the seminal work by Leibold et al. published in 2004 [2]. In their original work [2], Leibold et al. outlined the theoretical framework for the study of a metacommunity, a set of local communities connected by dispersing species. Logue et al.[1] point out some of the limitations of the original concept as well as more recent research. More importantly, they make three recommendations for future research in metacommunity ecology to continue to advance this field: (i) the extension of empirical approaches to different and varied metacommunity systems; (ii) the integration of established metacommunity paradigms; and (iii) work incorporating meta-ecosystem and evolutionary mechanisms. These are important recommendations, but we think that their second recommendation is a necessary condition for the other two. We propose that a revision of the terminology used by Leibold et al. [2] can already accomplish part of this integration.}, added-at = {2017-01-09T13:57:26.000+0100}, author = {Winegardner, Amanda K. and Jones, Brittany K. and Ng, Ingrid S. Y. and Siqueira, Tadeu and Cottenie, Karl}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2afeec93c68ab767114d5acd069bf3bf7/yourwelcome}, doi = {10.1016/j.tree.2012.01.007}, interhash = {8c93cf865b8e602a47135c2f8f2e0bed}, intrahash = {afeec93c68ab767114d5acd069bf3bf7}, issn = {0169-5347}, journal = {Trends in Ecology \& Evolution}, keywords = {imported}, month = may, number = 5, pages = {253--254}, timestamp = {2017-01-09T14:01:11.000+0100}, title = {The terminology of metacommunity ecology}, url = {http://www.cell.com/trends/ecology-evolution/fulltext/S0169-5347(12)00026-2?large_figure=true}, urldate = {2012-04-30}, volume = 27, year = 2012 }